Back
2021 Supreme(All) 1712
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
PANKAJ BHATIA, J.
Braj Lal - Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. - Opposite Party
Application U/s 482 No. 6049 of 2020
Decided On : 16-06-2021
For the Applicant : In Person, Basdeo Nishad.
For the Opposite Party : G.A., Moeez Uddin.
The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of Section 190 of the CrPC and the application of relevant judgments to support their decision.
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code - Land Dispute - Section 156(3) CrPC, Section 482 CrPC, Section 3(2)(v) ST/SC (PA) Act - The court discussed the application under Section 156(3) CrPC for registration of FIR, the challenge under Section 482 CrPC, and the order passed by the Special Judge under Section 190 CrPC. The court referred to the judgments of Lalita Kumari vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (2008) 7 SCC 164, Bhagwant Singh Vs. Commissioner of Police, 1985 Law Suit (SC) 148, Mahendra Pal Sharma Vs. State of U.P., 2003 Cr.L.J. 698, and Anand Swaroop Vs. State of U.P., 2006 0 Supreme (All) 709 to support their decision.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant claimed to be the sole owner of a piece of land and filed a suit against a convicted criminal for interfering with his possession. The court directed for registration of FIR, which was subsequently challenged, and a final report was filed. The applicant filed a protest petition against the final report, which was accepted by the Special Judge and treated as a complaint.
Finding of the Court:
The Special Judge's procedure was within the scope of power under Section 190 of the CrPC, and the application lacked merits and was dismissed.
Issues: The procedure adopted by the Special Judge and the interpretation of Section 190 of the CrPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the Special Judge's course of action was in line with the mandate of Section 190 CrPC.
Final Decision: The application lacked merits and was dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Basdeo Nishad, counsel for the applicant, Sri Moeez Uddin, counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 and perused the record.
2. The present application has been filed being aggrieved against the order dated 12.7.2019 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Allahabad on the protest petition filed by the applicant before the concerned Court.
3. The brief facts giving rise to the present application are as follows:
4. The applicant claims to be the sole owner of the land bearing Arazi No. 261 area 0.334 hectare situate at village Narai, Police Station Phoolpur and claims that his name is recorded in the Khatauni and Khasara.
5. It is claimed that one Bajrang Bahadur Patel, having criminal antecedents and being a convicted criminal, illegally started interfering in the possession of the applicant for which a civil suit was filed being Suit No. 2568 of 2011 in which interim injunction was passed in favour of the applicant on 21.11.2011. The accused Bajrang Bahadur Patel and seven others, in violation of the interim order, harvested the crop over the property in question complaining about which, an application was filed on 29.6.2015 under Section 156 (3) CrPC for registration of the FIR for the recovery of theft property. The said application was rejected and the case was registered as a complaint case by means of an order dated 22.8.2015, which was challenged before this Court by filing an application under Section 482 CrPC No. 13529 of 2016.
6. This Court in exercise of its powers called a report from the SSP, Allahabad and proceeded to pass the following order on 6.5.2016 :
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 22.08.2015 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-III, Allahabad in Complaint Case No. 1358 of 2015, under Sections 147, 382, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) ST/SC (PA) Act, Police Station Phoolpur, District Allahabad.
The applicant is a bhoomidhar with transferable rights, in possession over Plot No. 261, ad measuring 0.334 hectare situated at Village Narai, Police Station Phoolpur, District Allahabad. The name of the applicant is duly recorded in the Khasra and Khatauni. One Bajrang Bahadur having criminal history and being convicted for life under Section 302/34 I.P.C. upon being released on bail by this Court committed several cognizable offences including that of land grabbing.
It is alleged that Bajrang Bahadur and others started interfering with the plot of the applicant for extraneous consideration, the applicant, therefore, was constrained to institute a suit being Suit No. 2568 of 2011 (Braj Lal Versus Bajrang Bahadur and others), in which, learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Allahabad granted temporary injunction on 21.11.2011 in favour of the applicant.
It is alleged in the complaint that Bajrang Bahadur and seven others on 12.04.2014 at 6.00 P.M. forcefully harvested the wheat crops standing on the plot on the strength of country-made pistol and bombs. The applicant informed the police but no First Information Report was lodged, thereafter, the applicant moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. seeking a direction from the learned Magistrate to direct the police officer to register a First Information Report against the accused persons. The police officer submitted a report that no such incident had occurred and the complaint is false.
Learned Magistrate treated the application as a complaint case. Aggrieved, the applicant is before this Court. On 02.05.2016, learned A.G.A. was directed to seek instruction from the Senior Superintendent of Police, Allahabad. Upon instruction, the concerned Thana has informed that there is dispute, inter se, parties; Bajrang Bahadur is having criminal antecedent and has been convicted in a criminal case, further, Bajrang Bahadur has no concern with the plot in question as neither his name is recorded in the revenue record
